MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantum Synchronization Blockade: Energy Quantization Hinders Synchronization of Identical Oscillators

2017· article· en· W2595510886 on OpenAlexaff
Niels Lörch, Simon E. Nigg, Andreas Nunnenkamp, Rakesh P. Tiwari, Christoph Bruder

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern Formation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Center of Competence in Research Quantum Science and TechnologyHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungRoyal Society
KeywordsPhysicsSynchronization (alternating current)QuantumQuantization (signal processing)Synchronization networksQuantum mechanicsAmplitudeTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classically, the tendency towards spontaneous synchronization is strongest if the natural frequencies of the self-oscillators are as close as possible. We show that this wisdom fails in the deep quantum regime, where the uncertainty of amplitude narrows down to the level of single quanta. Under these circumstances identical self-oscillators cannot synchronize and detuning their frequencies can actually help synchronization. The effect can be understood in a simple picture: Interaction requires an exchange of energy. In the quantum regime, the possible quanta of energy are discrete. If the extractable energy of one oscillator does not exactly match the amount the second oscillator may absorb, interaction, and thereby synchronization, is blocked. We demonstrate this effect, which we coin quantum synchronization blockade, in the minimal example of two Kerr-type self-oscillators and predict consequences for small oscillator networks, where synchronization between blocked oscillators can be mediated via a detuned oscillator. We also propose concrete implementations with superconducting circuits and trapped ions. This paves the way for investigations of new quantum synchronization phenomena in oscillator networks both theoretically and experimentally.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern FormationFrench-language works237,207